557 réponses à ce sujet

[Rockworm503]

Obro wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

Obro wrote...

Ah yes official review sites are so "professional" and totally not paid to give good reviews.

You shouldn't trust anyone who says anything about anything unless its in a monotone voice or you agree with what their saying because.
Their obviously
1. trolling to make it look bad
2. being payed off.
And if they agree with you they are so obviously fair unbiased and know what their talking about.

There saved you a lot of trouble.

I'm sorry but you almost sounded like you actually believe EA doesn't pay them for good reviews and they have professional credibility.

Don't get me wrong I am agains the 0 on metacritic that's reserved for ...well ****. But it sure as hell doesn't deserve 9+ with no importing your save file retcons auto conversation that gives you no choice in what you're going to say and complete nesessity for renegade/paragon choices in order to do something. 

Maybe but then you'd have to think EVERY SINGLE one of them was payed off.
Take a look at the scores again.
IGN might be payed off but from what I've seen their genuinely excited for this game.
Gamespot?  Maybe but I don't pay attention.
When you say that this game does not deserve a certain number you automatically invalidate any one who gives it that number.
So what happens if a trusted reviewer gives it a 9?
Hes no longer trusted because you said it doesn't deserve a 9?
Give me a break that kind of mentality opens the door to "their all being payed off so why pay attention to any"
Either they are or their not but I rather not dwell on it.

[Obro]

Catsith wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
Dialogue is as fundamental to Bioware games as the combat, so not mentioning a big change - even if it doesn't bother you, or you think it was a good decision - to how it plays out seems like an incomplete review.

But, again, perhaps there wasn't enough of this alleged 'railroading' and auto-dialogue to bother these reviewers enough to remark on it. If they didn't notice a change, then they have no obligation to expose and comment on it.

But it is. They sais this is an RPG and then they remove RP with taking away the ability to controll what you way.

@
Rockworm503 

I don't trust reviewers PERIOD especially not IGN or Gamespot 

Modifié par Obro, 06 mars 2012 - 10:33 .

[fropas]

Obro wrote...

Catsith wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
Dialogue is as fundamental to Bioware games as the combat, so not mentioning a big change - even if it doesn't bother you, or you think it was a good decision - to how it plays out seems like an incomplete review.

But, again, perhaps there wasn't enough of this alleged 'railroading' and auto-dialogue to bother these reviewers enough to remark on it. If they didn't notice a change, then they have no obligation to expose and comment on it.

But it is. They sais this is an RPG and then they remove RP with taking away the ability to controll what you way.

 Only "paragon" and "renegade" options ever mattered anyway. . .Does it really matter what you say if it has no impact on the story?

[Lawliet89]

PC Gamer: We’re on PCs. We have 128 keys. We can handle a separate button for taking cover.
(http://www.pcgamer.c...ffect-3-review/)

I agree.

[CroGamer002]

Why do you even care for this reviews?

Only opinion that should matter to you about this or any other game, should be yours.
Also, user reviews are not trustworthy.

[RainyDayLover]

fropas wrote...

LilyasAvalon wrote...

You know, I'd like one professional reviewer to ignore the 'gift' sent by EA and actually do this review honestly. Label out everything they thought was good or bad and actually put EFFORT into looking into plot, story, character interaction, etc. instead of just essentially going 'WOW! AWESOME GAME! SO COOL! PLAY IT! LOL!" and slapping a 9/10 on it.

I'll be so happy when Good Game does their review, the guys on that show really put a lot of effort into reviewing the game.

http://www.giantbomb...-29935/reviews/

Jeff Gertsman--got fired from gamespot for giving Kane and Lynch a bad review. He's as close as you'll get to an "unbiased" opinion because he doesn't **** around when it comes to game reviewing.

I'll mention RPS again (http://www.rockpaper...ct-3-review-pc/). They're probably the most trust-worthy source for reviews (though they only review PC games/versions) even though I disagree with them sometimes. They don't give out a score and they tell it like it is.

Modifié par RainyDayLover, 06 mars 2012 - 10:36 .

[Sporothrix]

Acidrain92 wrote...

Bioware forum goer logic - every reviewer that gave ME3 a good score was paid off

I love how fans of the mass effect universe actually want ME3 to get a bad score xD

you guys are laughable

And of course proffesional reviewers gave DA2 only positive scores because it was high quality product and it deserved it, huh?

And of course a fact that much, much more people gave negative scores to ME3 than to ME1&2 combined and after all those years means nothing, it MUST BE just trolling and irrational hate to Bioware, right?

[Unfallen_Satan]

A separate rating category for "value" or "DRM" seems like a necessity. A lot of users are giving games poor reviews for Day 1 DLC or Origin/SecuROM/Steam association. Though I share their sentiment, rating a game poorly for those reasons ruins the value of user ratings. A good game is a good game, regardless of any value issues associated with it.

[Duncaaaaaan]

Mesina2 wrote...

Why do you even care for this reviews?

Only opinion that should matter to you about this or any other game, should be yours.
Also, user reviews are not trustworthy.

The economic climate is bad, many of us are tight for money, and games cost way too much now.

Sometimes, if we're unsure about a game, we don't know if it's going to be good or not, we want to have a look at other people's opinion. Thats the whole point of a review.

[txgoldrush]

MSNBC 10/10

[Rockworm503]

 So how do you decide a games worth it?Do you pre-order everything that looks interesting and then take it back if you don't like it?Lots of rentals?This "I don't trust reviewers PERIOD" is very final.An entire industry losing all credibility in someones eyes because a handful of them that work in the industry might be taking bribes.  *rolls eyes*
I trust this guy
http://angryjoeshow.com/

Because he tells it how it is.
He's as angry at first day DLC as I am and he gets on Capcom's case like no ones business.

But oh he can't be trusted because IGN can't be trusted.

Ok have fun with that paranoia.

Modifié par Rockworm503, 06 mars 2012 - 10:41 .

[Fragsmater]

Nice. The Xbox 360 version has 94 on metacritics.

[EnglishRedneck]

PDesign wrote...

metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-3 user score

See, this is why I hate people, they ruin everything.  Metacritic was meant to be a helpful site where you could get a decent look at the overall view of a game.  Now it's just a place where pond life go to hate on a popular game.  Pretty sad really.  Didn't bother reading them all, but here's a quote:
"I took it back for a refund and yelled at the cashier."

I think that pretty much sums up what their opinion is worth.

[Acidrain92]

misoretu9 wrote...

Acidrain92 wrote...

Bioware forum goer logic - every reviewer that gave ME3 a good score was paid off

I love how fans of the mass effect universe actually want ME3 to get a bad score xD

you guys are laughable

And of course proffesional reviewers gave DA2 only positive scores because it was high quality product and it deserved it, huh?

And of course a fact that much, much more people gave negative scores to ME3 than to ME1&2 combined and after all those years means nothing, it MUST BE just trolling and irrational hate to Bioware, right?

yeah O.o pretty much. Do you honestly think that every major reviewer of Mass Effect 3 was paid off? (I say every major reviewer because so far every major reviewer has given it a good score) Thats just ridiculous conspiracy theory logic. The only reason you people will ever think a reviewer ISNT paid off is if they give out a score that you agree with.

I cant stand the amount of closed minded and selfish logic that you people fill your heads with.

[Rockworm503]

EnglishRedneck wrote...

PDesign wrote...

metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-3 user score

See, this is why I hate people, they ruin everything.  Metacritic was meant to be a helpful site where you could get a decent look at the overall view of a game.  Now it's just a place where pond life go to hate on a popular game.  Pretty sad really.  Didn't bother reading them all, but here's a quote:
"I took it back for a refund and yelled at the cashier."

I think that pretty much sums up what their opinion is worth.

CASHIER Y U NO MAKE BETTER GAEM?!?!?!?!

[AkiKishi]

Unfallen_Satan wrote...

A separate rating category for "value" or "DRM" seems like a necessity. A lot of users are giving games poor reviews for Day 1 DLC or Origin/SecuROM/Steam association. Though I share their sentiment, rating a game poorly for those reasons ruins the value of user ratings. A good game is a good game, regardless of any value issues associated with it.

Like this ?


vaatiel
0
Is this truly the state of the video game industry at present? It used to be consumer desire that shaped what was released, now we have day 1 DLC and companies like Bioware that go to great extremes to censor anything that even closely resembles criticism. Are you going to bend over and let this happen?

The game is not always about the content especially to users. Something you don't buy because of DRM or day 1 DLC is still a lost sale.

I probably would have bought ME3 but because of the day 1 DLC I'm renting. No money for EA/Bioware.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 06 mars 2012 - 10:45 .

[Lawliet89]

Acidrain92 wrote...

misoretu9 wrote...

Acidrain92 wrote...

Bioware forum goer logic - every reviewer that gave ME3 a good score was paid off

I love how fans of the mass effect universe actually want ME3 to get a bad score xD

you guys are laughable

And of course proffesional reviewers gave DA2 only positive scores because it was high quality product and it deserved it, huh?

And of course a fact that much, much more people gave negative scores to ME3 than to ME1&2 combined and after all those years means nothing, it MUST BE just trolling and irrational hate to Bioware, right?

yeah O.o pretty much. Do you honestly think that every major reviewer of Mass Effect 3 was paid off? (I say every major reviewer because so far every major reviewer has given it a good score) Thats just ridiculous conspiracy theory logic. The only reason you people will ever think a reviewer ISNT paid off is if they give out a score that you agree with.

I cant stand the amount of closed minded and selfish logic that you people fill your heads with.

That's the vibe I get when I read several pages of this thread.

And I liked DA2... and I certainly didn''t get a single cent/pence from Bioware.

[Rockworm503]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Unfallen_Satan wrote...

A separate rating category for "value" or "DRM" seems like a necessity. A lot of users are giving games poor reviews for Day 1 DLC or Origin/SecuROM/Steam association. Though I share their sentiment, rating a game poorly for those reasons ruins the value of user ratings. A good game is a good game, regardless of any value issues associated with it.

Like this ?


vaatiel
0
Is this truly the state of the video game industry at present? It used to be consumer desire that shaped what was released, now we have day 1 DLC and companies like Bioware that go to great extremes to censor anything that even closely resembles criticism. Are you going to bend over and let this happen?

The game is not always about the content especially to users. Something you don't buy because of DRM or day 1 DLC is still a lost sale.

A 0 = broken and unplayable.
day 1 DLC is far from broken or unplayable......

[MeanderingMind]

So PC Gamer ("The global authority on PC games") gave DA2 94 and ME3 only 93? Good to know.

[Rickin10]

Obro wrote...

Ah yes official review sites are so "professional" and totally not paid to give good reviews.

It's not an issue of being 'paid', like the reviewers are taking backhanders and going MWAHAHAHAHAHA!  It's about survival for them and their site.  A lack of favourable reviews would have dire consequences for them.  The industry is so f******d.

[Ajwol Semreth]

EnglishRedneck wrote...

"I took it back for a refund and yelled at the cashier."

Quite ballsy of him to take a pirated copy of the game back to the store in the early hours of the morning... But seriously, I wonder what he thought that blatent lie would achieve.

[Lawliet89]

Croak99 wrote...

So PC Gamer ("The global authority on PC games") gave DA2 94 and ME3 only 93? Good to know.

LOL I don't really pay attention to the scores. And besides, I think different reviewers for both games so...

But damn, I hope someone adds a mod to remap some of the actions of the all too powerful spacebar.

[Rockworm503]

Lawliet89 wrote...

Acidrain92 wrote...

misoretu9 wrote...

Acidrain92 wrote...

Bioware forum goer logic - every reviewer that gave ME3 a good score was paid off

I love how fans of the mass effect universe actually want ME3 to get a bad score xD

you guys are laughable

And of course proffesional reviewers gave DA2 only positive scores because it was high quality product and it deserved it, huh?

And of course a fact that much, much more people gave negative scores to ME3 than to ME1&2 combined and after all those years means nothing, it MUST BE just trolling and irrational hate to Bioware, right?

yeah O.o pretty much. Do you honestly think that every major reviewer of Mass Effect 3 was paid off? (I say every major reviewer because so far every major reviewer has given it a good score) Thats just ridiculous conspiracy theory logic. The only reason you people will ever think a reviewer ISNT paid off is if they give out a score that you agree with.

I cant stand the amount of closed minded and selfish logic that you people fill your heads with.

That's the vibe I get when I read several pages of this thread.

And I liked DA2... and I certainly didn''t get a single cent/pence from Bioware.

I think its more "i can't tell the difference between a paid review and an honest one so I wont bother trying"
If you can't trust any reviewer because some of them might be dirty.... That says more about you then it does them.

[Catsith]

Obro wrote...
But it is. They sais this is an RPG and then they remove RP with taking away the ability to controll what you way.

They did not. You can still make story choices and attitude choices in the game, which I believe is more important to most people including these reviewers than navigating the wheel for a few extra lines of dialogue, or having an additional neutral line that's a copy of the paragon line. I'm not dismissing the general complaint of auto-dialogue, I'm suggesting that it might not be as big an issue for most people as some would have you believe, as evidenced by the complete lack of mention in ANY of these reviews, even the 8's.

[Catsith]

Croak99 wrote...

So PC Gamer ("The global authority on PC games") gave DA2 94 and ME3 only 93? Good to know.

Was it the same reviewer? If not, then that's irrelevant.